“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” Franklin d. Roosevelt
Has somebody decided that Sleepy Joe's got to go? That a different empty vessel is required, rather than the occasionally coherent dementia sufferer and, now that the mid-terms are done, it's time to frag the Supreme Leader? I ask because it seems as though the puppet installed in the 2020 coup has some top secret documents at both his Pennsylvania 'think tank' and his home in Delaware.(1) These papers are not of recent vintage – they date from his time as Vice President under Obama, which ended six years ago almost to the day and include intelligence memo and other material concerning Iran, Ukraine and the UK.
How these papers ended up in these locations is not yet known. It is clear that they must have been stored elsewhere initially, as the office space wasn't rented until mid 2017, perhaps six months after Biden left office. The question of whether he knew they were there is also shrouded in mystery and likely to remain so, unless some indisputably genuine documentation subsequently establishes the answer. Relying On Biden's memory and verisimilitude would be foolhardy, after all. Some of the circumstances can, however, be established, albeit with caveats. Biden's lawyers are allegedly the ones who found the think tank documents, which comprised around ten and which were located in a locked closet which they had opened during the process of vacating the suite of offices and taking all their belongings with them. They found them on 2nd November. So they say. Because lawyers are always in charge of relocations, aren't they?(2)
The suggestion is that, having discovered this breach of what all political hacks refer to as 'national security' (which, in this case, might actually be true), an abundance of caution led them to search other locations where Biden may also have stashed documents which should never have left the White House. On December 20th, further top secret documents are discovered in the ersatz President's house. Which is quite a long time after November 2nd. So far, so standard issue for Washington corruption and malfeasance.
None of this is disclosed at the time. The Department of Justice is in the loop, because the National Archives – to whom the think tank papers have been ferried – has informed them, but have clearly decided not to conduct any further searches themselves. It's not until 9th January that an anonymous source contacts the media (in the case, CBS)(3) and seemingly drops Biden in it by revealing the think tank discovery but, curiously, not the discovery of documents at his home. I say 'seemingly' because he may not be unaware of the plan. There then follows further drip feeding to NBC and others of the second discovery which seems to have been followed by a third and perhaps a fourth in different locations at his home address.(4)(5)(6) The most recent scene in the play features the Attorney General appointing a special counsel to investigate the President.
If you're thinking it all sounds like a three ring circus, you'd be right. The media's bare bones version of the alleged events thusfar do not even begin to scratch the surface of what is clearly yet another plot of some kind. There are a number of possible motivations and outcomes which I will come to in due course. Firstly, however, the missing detail, the color palette that will bring life to the sketched outline.
Former President Trump is, himself, under investigation for the same alleged misdeeds. Naturally, the mockingbird media are making much of the purported differences between the two sets of circumstances. Trump is said to have refused to co-operate with authorities, whereas Biden immediately sent the documents over to the archives. This isn't true. Trumps' lawyers were in communication with the National Archives and authorities had already been to Trump's residence at Mar-a-Lago and inspected the storage location.
I'll return to this unprecedented scenario shortly, but the one point to absorb here is that Trump was the President and Biden (in 2017) wasn't. The President has the authority to de-classify any document; the Vice President doesn't. And, as you might expect, Trump says he had declassified the 300 documents seized in the raid.(7) Biden cannot avail himself of the same defense.
Secondly, there are some peculiarities about Biden's Delaware house and some shady looking sequences of events that give rise to legitimate concerns about the security of both the think tank and the home address. Biden's on/off crack addicted son, Hunter (he of 'the laptop from hell' infamy), claimed that he owned the house, for starters. He also claimed that he was paying nearly $50,000 a month in housing costs (presumably a figure that large would include rent), which seems contradictory.(8) Then again, this is a man who abandoned a rental car and left a crack pipe and his ID inside,(9) as well as leaving the incriminating computer at the repair shop and never returning to collect it again.(10) Given that, if he was living in the Delaware house, he would need a key to get in, Hunter Biden clearly had access to these documents if he so desired. This is not indicative of an optimum level of security.
Figure 1
Thirdly, the think tank. Hunter has a supporting role in this scene, too. Between 2014 and 2019, the University of Pennsylvania raked in $54 million in anonymous donations from China. Most of them came after the university announced that the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement would be created on site. Hunter Biden also had Chinese business interests who wanted him to lobby for them, but didn't want to register as foreign agents.(11) I'm not sure that all this is entirely coincidental. The university, however, is in no doubt as to the probity of the arrangement. They say none of the money was solicited by Biden's think tank, nor were any of the donations sent directly to the Center. However, the university's spokesperson rather spoiled the effect by refusing to say what they did spent the money on, so skepticism is warranted.(12)
The think tank cannot be the only place these documents resided and, therefore, they have been ferried around more than once. There's a six month gap in 2017 and a further gap from mid 2017 to February 8th 2018, when the Biden Penn Center opened its doors. While Biden had an office at the University of Pennsylvania for the second spell, Hunter established an office with an emissary for the chairman of a Chinese energy company in Washington in 2017. Biden senior had keys to it. Isn't it more likely that the documents were near Biden in Washington, rather than in Pennsylvania? Either way, they must have been moved more than once.(13)
There is another fairly obvious question that should be asked; how could Hunter Biden afford to pay $50,000 a month in housing costs? Well, he was receiving $83,333 a month from the Ukrainian oil company Burisma, for doing diddly squat; to be fair, he couldn't do anything, as he knew nothing about the oil business. It does seem, however, that the junior Biden is also conduit, rather than a sole beneficiary. There is plenty of evidence to indicate that he is the one that pays for his father's living expenses and has done foe a considerable time. It's a simple grift – Hunter gets jobs he doesn't do on the back of his surname and then funnels the money to his father. (14)
In another coincidence, Biden senior was Obama's point man in Ukraine and had visited perhaps a dozen times. His influence was such that he was able to threaten to withhold $1 billion of US guarantees unless the president of Ukraine fired the prosecutor who was investigating Hunter Biden and Burisma, which the head of state duly did. We know this because the current president was dumb enough to boast of this achievement while being interviewed on camera.(15) So, an actual impeachable offence, rather than the first attempt against Trump.
What are we make of it all? How is it that Biden's lawyers are the ones who have fronted up and told the DoJ, and then the press, that their own client has broken the law?(16) Because, no matter how much the media tries to convince us otherwise, the odds are tipped strongly in that direction. He shouldn't have had them and they clearly weren't stored securely. Nonetheless, the only reason we know about this breach at all is because we've been told. Why didn't they just take them to the National Archives (or, better yet, simply destroy them)? And I would suggest that citing some sense of moral duty as the reason is hopelessly naïve.
I say this, not from cynicism, but rather from past knowledge. Remember the Clinton email scandal, when it was found that Hillary had set up a private server (outside of governmental scrutiny) and use it to grift for the Clinton Foundation while serving as Secretary of State? The arrangement violated the Espionage Act of 1913...
“...by allowing national defense information to be “lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed” through “gross negligence.” Clinton team emails have now ended up in the hands of Julian Assange — a man who lives sequestered in an Ecuadorian embassy — and in the hands of detectives...”(17)
A lot of the information on her private hacked server was classified. For the FBI, a slam dunk case. But they declined to prosecute, citing their opinion that Clinton didn't have the necessary criminal intent.(18) This is, of course, a straw man argument. Judging intent is not only largely subjective, it was also not required in this instance; proof of gross negligence would have sufficed and sending classified information on a private server which is then intercepted meets that definition with something to spare. Not forgetting the fact it is illegal to delete material that is subject to an ongoing investigation, which Clinton also did.(19) But this furore blew up when she was campaigning against Trump for the presidency and she was the establishment's chosen one, so it all went away.
Barack Obama's conduct is even more egregious. When he left office, he trucked 30 million pages of administration records to a warehouse in Chicago. He promised to digitalize them, as required, and post them online. Somewhat predictably, this hasn't happened.(20) Trump claims that this tranche contains classified material, including documents pertaining to nuclear weapons. Obama and the National Archives say not but, to paraphrase Many Rice-Davis, “Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?”(21) It seems unlikely that, in the absence of digital copies, the National Archive has examined every document in situ.
Of course, it may just be that Biden's lawyers are running scared and that there is no grand conspiracy. The street-lawyer rule is that if someone has to go to jail, make sure it's the client rather than you. And there is definitely something odd about using his own lawyers to search, because if they found classified material, they wouldn't have the security clearance to take possession of it and, as it transpired, the Penn Biden lawyers have been compromised on that score. Perhaps, they decided to cover their own backsides and expose Biden's. Perhaps. But, presumably, as Biden is the client, it falls to him to instruct them, which exposes him to yet more legal jeopardy; and the lawyers, by extension. Or perhaps the introduction of an additional layer of attorney-client privilege into the equation means that it was worth the risk.
What other clues exist, that might assist us in understanding who is doing what to whom and why? Well, on the face of it, it seems that official agencies are doing their job as they should be doing it. The FBI is involved and there is a special counsel. This may be because, at present, they don't feel that they can do otherwise, as the lawyers have forced their hand. And perhaps the timeline partly supports that hypothesis. The account of the initial discovery at the think tank sounds plausible, if one ignores the fact that his lawyers were the ones doing it; and if they were truly moving offices.
Additionally, the date of the discovery - 2nd November – was six days before the mid-terms and would almost certainly have had a deleterious impact on Biden's chances. Most people are likely to draw the conclusion that the suppression of the story had an illegitimate effect on the outcome. Rather like the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story effected the 2020 presidential election, inasmuch as nearly 20% Biden voters would gave defected.(22) This action adds to the sense that an investigation must be conducted.
And thirdly, once the affair became public knowledge, the Attorney General would have had to be seen to be treating Biden as he had Trump. The time honored long drawn out inquiry ruse may yet be deployed and some new shiny media objects may be unearthed, the better to distract our attention, but for now he may well have felt he had no option but to play with a straight bat. So scenario numero uno is, effectively, a limited hangout that can be used to neutralize a morally squeamish lawyer and eventually simply runs out the clock.
The second scenario is that Biden is being given a warning or, alternatively, is being forced out of the door. The evidence for this is plentiful, but inconclusive. Some who might be expected to come to the aid of the President, which would ordinarily include almost every media outlet, the intelligence community and pretty much everybody else inside the DC beltway, are not doing so. In particular, Andrew Weissmann – by most accounts, a nasty piece of work and the tip of the Deep State's legal/lawfare arrow – had this to say;
“The WH keeps digging a hole deeper: they have failed to answer so many questions, which is very strange if this is all an innocent mistake. -Total number of government docs found and precisely where; and what levels of classification? -Why wasn't this all revealed in Nov/Dec?”(23)
More of a stab in the back than an arm around the shoulders. And why would Weissman have gone of the record in that fashion? One theory doing the rounds is that Biden has forgotten that he needs to remain in his box. After the enormous fraudulent effort in the mid-terms was only partially successful, the prospect of doing it all again in 2024, for the third (or probably fourth) cycle running is all a bit too much. Perhaps, he'd been encouraged not to run again in 2024 and dropping frequent hints that he would has not gone down well with Obama and the shadow government.(24) The timing is certainly suggestive; after the election, two years to the next one and the fact that, after six years, now they find the documents?
Most of the rest of the mainstream were used to convey a different message, which is useful both defensively and offensively and undoubtedly part of the intended outcome. There was a chorus of co-ordinated voices comparing the Trump and Biden cases and, naturally, coming down on the side of Biden;
“They still remain Democrat loyalists and hence they portray Biden’s and Trump’s circumstances as "Cooperation vs. Obstruction." "Misplaced vs. Stolen." "Voluntary vs. Subpoena." "Immediate vs. Search Warrant."(25)
And this is important. By constructing a near mirror image that they can spin in this way, it's going to be possible to breath new life into the Trump inquiry, which had all gone a bit limp. Perhaps the idea is to be 'even-handed' and prosecute them both, thus spiking the Republican Party, who will find it difficult to complain about the continued partisan persecution of Trump when the DoJ has also helped impeach Biden. Perhaps the Deep State wants both pieces removed from the board.
What the media won't tell us is, once again, that the issue of intent is not critical to any prosecution. As with the Espionage Act, gross negligence will suffice and, even this early in the piece, storing top secret documents that he had no right to possess in the garage of a house also inhabited by his crack addict son is rather more serious than storing documents that Trump had the right to declassify in a locked room guarded by security. But the media emphasis on 'intent' indicates that they are more likely to simply go for Trump and not Biden. As Joy Behar of The View, who seems to revel in vindictiveness and ignorance in equal measure;
"...we all know that Trump is a liar and a thief. We know that. So it's not that big a jump to say that he obstructed and he lied. We don't think Biden is a liar and a thief, so we give him the benefit of the doubt."(26)
Biden might only be required to renounce another tilt at the presidency for it all to go away. In that case, he stays until 2024 and they fix the primaries (again) to ensure that the party's favored candidate makes the ballot. That clearly won't be Kamala Harris, who is the only politician in the US who is less liked than Biden. I believe it'll probably be Michelle Obama, although Gavin Newsom is an equally gruesome possibility. However, if they really want Biden out of the way now, it may well be within their gift. In this scenario, Biden's use of his own lawyers to conduct the searches is a tactic in an internecine Democrat war.
There are other possibilities, some of them intriguing and Machiavellian. For instance, it's also possible that the whole purpose of the charade is simply to have the grounds to appoint a special counsel and then obstruct any impeachment investigation by refusing to disclose the contents of an ongoing 'criminal' investigation. The battle for the speakership of the House, and the unexpected concessions that McCarthy had to make to the Freedom Caucus in order to win, may have upset the apple cart. He was (and may still be), at best, a milquetoast Republican and swamp creature par excellence. He could have been relied upon to be the very definition of controlled opposition, promising much and delivering very little that appealed to the GOP's base.
However, he has had to immediately start making good on his promises to the America First wing of his party and, instead of the brickbats that he usually finds sailing in his direction, there has been an explosion of praise. The danger, for the Democrats, is that he starts to acquire a taste for it and realizes that there is another path to the seat of power. In which case, it would be entirely their own fault. Instead of marching in lock-step – in all fifteen rounds every single Democrat voted for their own candidate, knowing that he wouldn't win – they should have done a deal with McCarthy, voted him in and ensured that he was at least partially neutered. They didn't, because it's not in their character to take a step back and now they may have a proper battle on their hands.
The Republicans have already talked of suspending funding for the special councils and, effectively, disenfranchising them. The mechanism for this is said to be the Holman Rule, which allows amendments to legislation that could reduce the salary of or fire federal employees.(27) However, it may well be that the scope of this rule is not sufficient to target specific individuals, but departments and agencies instead.
What does seem clear is that, under normal swamp conditions, Biden's breach would never have come to light and yet it has. It's possible that it's a double hit on both Biden and Trump but, given the pathological nature of the Deep State's hatred of Trump and the constant harassment of him (the latest example being the completely unwarranted release of his tax returns, which turned out to be yet another nothing burger)(28) and the fact that whatever they say it is about, it'll almost certainly be the exact opposite, I believe Trump is definitely in the cross-hairs. Biden, maybe not so much. Perhaps just a warning shot. This analysis seems the most likely;
“By assigning a special counsel to Biden, the DOJ has now been given urgency to get to the bottom of the Trump faux scandal. By assigning a special counsel to Biden, the previously stagnant, unwarranted, and dead-end investigation into Trump's possession of "classified documents" is suddenly rendered relevant, justified, and non-partisan. The Democrats aren't looking to get rid of Biden so much as they've revitalized their efforts to get rid of Trump. We now have dueling special counsels, and the DOJ will ultimately be "forced" to present a verdict to the American people.”(29)
The fact that the special counsel acts as a brake on House Republicans will also be part of the scheme. These people aren't stupid. At least, not in some ways. They can be a little obvious, though, but as they don't care what we think and because they believe that they are always right, that doesn't matter. I would also be keeping an ear to the ground and an eye out for a one paragraph story buried on page nine, at some point soon. If they keep banging on about intent, then Biden is probably not part of a twofer. If the Twitter file drops on Hunter and his corruption, which implicates Biden senior too, starts to get airplay, then both are targets.(30) The art of deception is alive and well in Washington D.C.
Citations
(2) Ditto
(3) https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-center-classified-documents/
(5) https://www.tmz.com/2023/01/14/even-more-classified-documents-found-president-biden-home/
(8)
(10) https://nypost.com/2022/03/17/the-times-finally-admits-hunter-bidens-laptop-is-real/
(12) https://nypost.com/2022/04/09/54m-in-chinese-gifts-donated-to-upenn-home-of-biden-center/
(15) https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4820105/user-clip-biden-tells-story-ukraine-prosecutor-fired
(17) https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2016/10/31/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-explained/
(19) https://irch.com/destruction-of-hillary-clintons-emails/
(21) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
(23)
(24) https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-shows-strongest-sign-yet-he-will-run-2024
(25) https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/a_theory_of_dueling_special_counsels.html
(26) Ditto
(27) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holman_rule
(29) https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/a_theory_of_dueling_special_counsels.html
(30) https://www.dailywire.com/collections/the-hunter-biden-files
Figure 1